1. Comment #43503 by crumbledfingers on May 21, 2007 at 8:52 pm

Hitchens' last line is unforgettable; one wonders if he deliberately timed it to land right before the Faux News Fadeout?

Other Comments by crumbledfingers

2. Comment #43505 by LeeLeeOne on May 21, 2007 at 8:59 pm

Why should someone like Falwell's family enjoy any moment of reconcilliation (a moment of peace)? They promoted this man's inhumanity to man, they supported this man's inhumanity to man, they lived with and agreed with his ideals!

Why should anyone give this man's family a moment of peace?

Because we are human, and we do not condone inhumane treatment

OKAY, the 5 seconds are up!

Anything in memory of Jerry Falwell's life should be nothing less than harsh criticism! AND this includes the family and his friends who supported his any of his "ideals."

Other Comments by LeeLeeOne

3. Comment #43508 by Coelacanth on May 21, 2007 at 9:08 pm

I only wish I had Hitchen's quick-witted and biting come-backs . . . You can tell that Hannity was intimidated. I would love to see Hitchens go head to head with O'Reily. It's not only what he says but how he says it that makes him so formidable.

Other Comments by Coelacanth

4. Comment #43509 by vertigo25 on May 21, 2007 at 9:27 pm

I love how Hannity, a college drop out with an "honorary" degree from Liberty "University," tries to take jabs at Hitchens' (an Oxford grad) intelligence and intellectual abilities.

Other Comments by vertigo25

5. Comment #43511 by MrEmpirical on May 21, 2007 at 9:40 pm

The great thing about Hitchens is that he knows - from experience - how to play the journalistic game. He knows when to interrupt, he knows how to interrupt, and he knows how to ensure that he himself doesn't get interrupted. These skills are so important when dealing with Fox News interviews, whereby the conservative religious lapdogs get to recite their political rhetoric without restraint, while atheists and secularists get drowned out.

Other Comments by MrEmpirical

6. Comment #43514 by mintcheerios on May 21, 2007 at 9:45 pm

"And why not a word now from the friend of Jack Abramoff".

Hah, take that Rex Reed.

Other Comments by mintcheerios

7. Comment #43515 by Fouad Boussetta on May 21, 2007 at 9:48 pm

Sorry, I couldn't make out Hichens' last sentence.
What did he say?

Other Comments by Fouad Boussetta

8. Comment #43516 by DavidJGrossman on May 21, 2007 at 9:50 pm

Ooooh, Falwell gave away scholarships to Liberty University. That's a good thing? That's like commending Paris Hilton for giving away STDs.

- Dave

Other Comments by DavidJGrossman

9. Comment #43517 by DavidJGrossman on May 21, 2007 at 9:55 pm

"If you gave Falwell an enema, he could be buried in a matchbox." - Hitchens

Haha, priceless! I wonder if he was saving that one or came up with it on the spot.

- Dave

Other Comments by DavidJGrossman

10. Comment #43518 by peter gregory on May 21, 2007 at 9:58 pm

Oh Christopher you are truly Socrates bulldog,what mega-monumental face, seemingly surrounded by intellecual pygmies. Bravo! So courageous,I think my heart would die in such confrontations, and I grew up in Tottenham! How did Finsbury Park produce such a Lion? Good onya mate.

Other Comments by peter gregory

11. Comment #43519 by EndlessForms on May 21, 2007 at 10:03 pm

HOLY SHIT, thank goodness fox "news" isn't taken seriously anywhere else in the world. Seriously, I have never seen so much bullshit spewing out at such volume! It's like watching a news program try to make hitler come off as a saint after he died, bunch of charlatans!

Makes me sick; I thought O'reilly was the worst, but every shmuck on that network is nausiating.

I'm glad Hitchens fought that set-up, good show!

Other Comments by EndlessForms

12. Comment #43522 by MorituriMax on May 21, 2007 at 10:22 pm

You notice how Hannity talked over Hitchens reply about how we need to respect anyone who gives to charity, "Then you have to respect Hamas and Hezbollah."

Other Comments by MorituriMax

13. Comment #43523 by Reg on May 21, 2007 at 10:25 pm

Hannity, "Your being mean" ha! what a moron, he would definitely stand a chance in a Barney Rubble thinkalike contest. But against the Hitch, no no…

Other Comments by Reg

14. Comment #43524 by roach on May 21, 2007 at 10:51 pm

I agree with Dave. That last comment by Hitches was hilarious.

Other Comments by roach

15. Comment #43525 by BaronOchs on May 21, 2007 at 10:52 pm

That Hannity is a coarse little overgrown schoolboy, how the b****cks does someone like that get on tv?

This thread could re-titled Orwell Scholar in Orwellian Nightmare. Just because falwell was a reverend respect for that lump of faeces is demanded from everyone, but we're very lucky to have someone as outspoken and articulate as Hitchens and I hope at least some people watch that and think actually he has a point.

Other Comments by BaronOchs

16. Comment #43526 by flyingscot on May 21, 2007 at 10:57 pm

The news team are less than feather weights against a consummate heavy weight like Hitchins. He certainly makes them look like the fools that they are.
Bravo Hitch.......

Other Comments by flyingscot

17. Comment #43528 by twblalock on May 21, 2007 at 11:02 pm

I didn't catch what his last comment was. What was it?

Other Comments by twblalock

18. Comment #43530 by Reg on May 21, 2007 at 11:21 pm

twblalock - see Comment #43517 by DavidJGrossman on May 21, 2007 at 9:55 pm above


A little off topic but I just heard this one and needed to pass it on.


A Christian moderate was walking along a cliff top when the edge gave way and he started to fall to the rocks below. Fortunately he was able to grab hold of branch and hung there helplessly. With only a tentative grip on a plant that he felt his god had designed only for its aesthetics and not for defying gravity, he started to shout at the top of his voice, "HELP,IS THERE ANYBODY THERE, PLEASE, CAN ANYONE HERE ME" but after repeating his cries many times there seemed no hope. Suddenly a bellowing, deep voice, that seemed to emanate from all around, inside and out spoke to him with the words "my son, I am your God, you have been a good Christian and you have no reason to fear, just release your grip from the branch and I will catch you, then place you at the top of the cliff". The guy thought his very deepest thoughts for a few seconds and then shouted, HELP, IS THERE ANYBODY ELSE THERE.

Other Comments by Reg

19. Comment #43539 by Logicel on May 22, 2007 at 12:45 am

French drivers will sometimes encounter a road sign stating, Rappelle. A straightforward translation is simply, Remember. However, what it means to the French is: Just because you think you are driving's gift to the world and your car is wondrous, don't forget that you can kill yourself and others if you drive like an idiot and ignore road conditions.

That is how Hitchens used the word, Sir, which when uttered by him repeatedly when interrupted by these pathetic excuses of broadcast journalists, meant, If you continue to ignore my polite, but firm repetition of 'Sir', the world will think that you are impolite, and you would not want that, so even though you want to shut me up, you want even more for the world to think Christians are fair and polite.

Superb tactic on the part of Hitch.

Other Comments by Logicel

20. Comment #43540 by JesperB on May 22, 2007 at 12:51 am

Great clip. Hitchens, as MrEmpirical said, has great timing at these events.

As for Hannity, he has plenty of reasons to act like a douche. I don't believe for a second that he believes most of what he says or advocates. He is as big a fraud as Fallwell was. But Hannity makes $100000 per night as a speaker.

Nope, not a typo. George H.W. Bush, who has been head of the CIA and of course vice president and president gets $80000 (You may, as I do, disagree with his politics, but he certainly has lots of interesting stories to tell).

Hannity, who has no other background than hosting radio and TV news (I'm using the word news in it's broadest possible sense, so it can include Faux) gets more - 100K for an hour or so of hot air and conservative talking points. Add whatever FN pays him and you have a very wealthy man. No wonder he spouts this nonsense. It has made him rich.

Other Comments by JesperB

21. Comment #43541 by JesperB on May 22, 2007 at 12:52 am

twblalock, see Comment #43516 to answer your question.

Other Comments by JesperB

22. Comment #43546 by elfinabout on May 22, 2007 at 1:23 am

Oh Mr. Hitchens, you are my linguistic hero.

"If you gave Falwell an enema, he could be buried in a matchbox" - I nearly wet myself on the spot.

Beautiful.

Other Comments by elfinabout

23. Comment #43552 by Zaphod on May 22, 2007 at 1:44 am

"If you gave Falwell an enema, he could be buried in a matchbox." - Hitchens

Hilarious.

Other Comments by Zaphod

24. Comment #43558 by dancingthemantaray on May 22, 2007 at 2:09 am

"only wish I had Hitchen's quick-witted and biting come-backs . . . You can tell that Hannity was intimidated. I would love to see Hitchens go head to head with O'Reily. It's not only what he says but how he says it that makes him so formidable."

You mean his butting in and overtalking? I know it's common on US interviews, but I think it sounds ignorant and bullying- other than that I liked very much what he had to say, cannot stand hypocrites who praise people they dislike merely because they're dead

Other Comments by dancingthemantaray

25. Comment #43562 by Biblebeltheretic on May 22, 2007 at 2:49 am

Watching this clip brought back a conversation from my distant military past when some friends and I were having a few beers. One friend was venting about a fellow we all knew who had just died and was very much disliked by all when one of the others cut in and said "Hey, the man's dead. Your supposed to say something good about a person who is dead". My friend thought for a second and replied "He's dead... good!"

Other Comments by Biblebeltheretic

26. Comment #43564 by jonecc on May 22, 2007 at 3:09 am

dancingthemantaray:

I found Hitchens' tactic a little discomforting too, but it's worth bearing in mind that it was a response to being not just on US TV in general, but on Fox in particular. Because Fox is dominated by conservatives and Bible bashers, liberal secularists have to be aggressive to get their point across.

It's also important to emphasise, as Hitchens did, that Falwell isn't offensive just because he was religious, but because he preached hate, and in particular because he used sophisticated advertising techniques to extract donations from mainly low-income Americans.

Other Comments by jonecc

27. Comment #43566 by Corylus on May 22, 2007 at 3:16 am

I was intrigued by the reference to "Dr" Falwell… Huh?? I said to myself, but the man obviously appears to have read only one book! So I looked it up. Apparently, he has three "honorary doctorates".

Evidently, no one informed Jerry that to get an honorary doctorate and then use the title "Dr" (unless, of course, one is already one anyway!) is very bad form.

Now, I think honorary degrees have a very important place. They are for recognising and encouraging people whose work spans disciplines, people have made a difference for the better for people's lives and, also, for recognising that some people display astonishing intellects without ever setting foot in a university. Many, many people earn their honorary degrees (I believe RD has them coming out of his ears!) and it is absolutely right that they can be awarded and recognition shown.

However, when attending my graduation ceremonies (I've had several) nothing was more guaranteed to irritate me than (after being awarded a degree for which I had worked my t*ts off) seeing some media mediocrity (invited by the university for publicity and fund-raising purposes only) poncing about in robes they simply hadn't earned.

I am so glad that I was never at any of Falwell's graduation ceremonies: I would have walked out in disgust. This is only beaten by Mike Tyson's honorary degree @%!* me!

Honorary degrees should mean something, dammit!

Sorry guys, off post rant, but I had to get it off my chest.

Other Comments by Corylus

28. Comment #43569 by eggplantbren on May 22, 2007 at 3:25 am

>>If you gave Falwell an enema, he could be buried in a matchbox." - Hitchens
<<

I don't get it.

Other Comments by eggplantbren

29. Comment #43570 by jonecc on May 22, 2007 at 3:28 am

It turns out two of his honorary degrees were from unaccredited institutions, and one was from the Temple Baptist Seminary of Tennessee, whose accreditation comes from the Transnational Association of Christian Colleges and Schools, who were founded to "promote the welfare, interests, and development of postsecondary institutions, whose mission is characterized by a distinctly Christian purpose.

I suppose he called himself Doctor because he'd doctored his own academic record.

Other Comments by jonecc

30. Comment #43571 by jonecc on May 22, 2007 at 3:29 am

eggplantbren: he means that if you removed all the shit from him there would be virtually nothing left.

Other Comments by jonecc

31. Comment #43573 by eggplantbren on May 22, 2007 at 3:42 am

Thanks, I figured that out about 10 seconds after clicking submit. :)

Other Comments by eggplantbren

32. Comment #43578 by Thanny on May 22, 2007 at 4:06 am

Regarding the "Dr." Falwell, bit, it was only Reed calling him that.

After the second time he used the title, you can hear Hitchens scoffing at him.

Other Comments by Thanny

33. Comment #43581 by phasmagigas on May 22, 2007 at 4:19 am

ive said it before but i still cannot believe how interviews on US TV operate, the interviewers bias totally dictating the direction of the interview, Im just glad somebody as thick skinned and brash as hitchens was sat in that studuo. This interviewing style is something just not seen on BBC Tv for example. The way politics and religion permeates the news waves like this is incredible. I'm just sorry for any kids sat watching that channel with their parents and getting sucked into its void.

Other Comments by phasmagigas

34. Comment #43584 by phasmagigas on May 22, 2007 at 4:27 am

after watching that news shot I just thank my lucky stars i was raised in the UK, at the very least I didnt have to have my intelligence insulted with ever flick of a channel (and we only had 4 until recently!) That mindnumbing, self congratulatory, self interested, prozac smiled delivery sells every product under the sun, luckily im not buying.

Other Comments by phasmagigas

35. Comment #43586 by pewkatchoo on May 22, 2007 at 4:33 am

phasmagigas, just what planet are you living on? This does not happen on BBC! Hahahaha, funniest thing I have heard this year! Jeremy Paxman, James Naughtie, etc., are famous for leading interviews in the direction they want. If you try to put your viewpoint (particularly if it is not leftie) you are shot down in flames. As far as the beeb is concerned, if you have even a slightly right of centre bias then you have no opinions worth listening to.

Other Comments by pewkatchoo

36. Comment #43590 by phasmagigas on May 22, 2007 at 4:44 am

pewkatchoo.

My mistake, i should have said the BBC news rather than the BBC period. Lets just say that the overtly biased and attacking stance from the interviewer (and remember fox interviewers were calling shirley phelps an abomination upon her interview)is way rarer in the UK TV news. Now unless ive simply been agreeing with all the bias interviewers previously but ive never seen anything like hannity and co on BBc news, have you?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CfTDxnbsxZQ

there paxy with RD funnily enough, maybe he agrees with RD on most stuff? but come on, this is a different kettle of fish that hannity, admittedly its not quite equivalent but there you go.

Other Comments by phasmagigas

37. Comment #43593 by freeurmind on May 22, 2007 at 4:56 am

This is good stuff,aside from the fact that he made the fully clothed monkeys @fox noise be sorry for being alive that day Hitchens said "the need to defend the Israeli occupation" which is something you hear once in a blue moon in America.There might be many out there who share the same opinion but in America nobody talks about it,it is taboo,it's either you have something nice to say or not say it at all.It gets a free pass(same as religion did for so long)it's not nice to talk about it openly ,it just not,why not?'cause it's not.
Ok ok !I saw RD's videos too many time hence the last line.

Other Comments by freeurmind

38. Comment #43599 by blueollie on May 22, 2007 at 5:06 am

Sorry, I couldn't make out Hichens' last sentence.
What did he say?
--------------

He said that if you "gave him (Falwell) and enema before you buried him you could have fit him in a matchbox". :)

Other Comments by blueollie

39. Comment #43602 by blueollie on May 22, 2007 at 5:11 am

Just one other note: I wouldn't take this exchange too seriously. For those who don't live in the U. S.: Fox "news" is more of less an entertainment channel for conservative, and to be frank, rather ignorant viewers.

To be blunt: Fox was probably delighted to have Hitchens on their show and that he did as well as he did; this sort of "back and forth" is exactly what Fox viewers want to see. And in the mind of the Fox viewers, Hannity (the star; Colmes is merely a foil) did very well, delivering insults to that "arrogant egghead" Hitchens.

Think of it as professional wrestling (in the US, there are these fixed, melodramatic contests were spandex wrapped, steroid enhanced men get into fake fights, with the "good" guy eventually winning at the end)

Other Comments by blueollie

40. Comment #43607 by GoatBoy36 on May 22, 2007 at 5:22 am

On Hitchens' last comment: you'll all remember the way Hannity sneaked one in during his previous interview with Hitchens, when he insisted once Hitchens was off camera and the interview was over that there is a god. (So there!) Hitchens obviously remembered that, and did the same right back to Mr. Hannity, next chance he got. Outstanding!

GB.

Other Comments by GoatBoy36

41. Comment #43610 by phasmagigas on May 22, 2007 at 5:36 am

blueollie. I see your point re the wrestling match. The programme in their (viewers) eyes would be improved only by having hannity/colmes wear a blue mask and a shield and hitchens would have a red cloak and a pitch fork. I suppose the problem is when people watch this and think it IS the news.

Other Comments by phasmagigas

42. Comment #43611 by freeurmind on May 22, 2007 at 5:42 am

Fox noise is an"entertainment channel" for many of us who have a brain ,unfortunately it is a "news Chanel" for milions of Americans who take Fox's word as the ultimate truth and form their opinion based on what they see on this channel( for these folks there is no alternative source of information besides this channel).And on the same note if you watch any of the other American major news stations you soon realize that all are swimming in the same bucket,the content of the news is so similar that is extremely hard to build any sort of critical analysis .America is in that regard extremely isolated informational wise.The Canadian station CBC is so much better than any of the American major broadcasters.Watching TV in America is like walking in the desert,its hot and arid ,inhospitable and even now and then there is an oasis ,unfortunately these oasis are very few and too far apart.

Other Comments by freeurmind

43. Comment #43612 by MAS2007 on May 22, 2007 at 5:43 am

It is really sad to see people defending reverend(snake oil salesman) falwell (Capitals not deserved), who knows how long it will take to remove the poison he spewed forth.

The interviewer missed the point that respect has to be earned to be meaningful.

So glad I don't view Faux news on a daily basis.

Other Comments by MAS2007

44. Comment #43615 by AtheistJunkie on May 22, 2007 at 5:50 am

That reed guy was calling him doctor falwell. WTF.

Hitch is unshakable. He's a rock.

Other Comments by AtheistJunkie

45. Comment #43616 by phasmagigas on May 22, 2007 at 5:52 am

seems Hitchens and co. find them selves between a rock and a hard place, the right will attack them for being critical of their religion, the left will (perhaps less often) attack them for being critical of all religions.

Other Comments by phasmagigas

46. Comment #43617 by BaronOchs on May 22, 2007 at 5:55 am

The world needs more people like Hitchens who aren't afraid to be outspoken when the truth is at stake.

quaqua I now intend to read all his books. I've already made a start but I'm not setting myself a timescale for it.

Other Comments by BaronOchs

47. Comment #43620 by cybercoma on May 22, 2007 at 6:09 am

I don't remember any moment of peace or respect for Hamas Leaders when they died and they too gave to charity, as Hitchens said.

This interview could've used a lot less personal attacks and more facts. Hitchens made his points as to why Falwell was a dangerous man, Rex made his points as to why Falwell was a good man and that should've been all that was debated. Instead, Hannity goes on to call Hitchens a pseudointellectual and a jackass, then goes on to tell him that his opinion is wrong.

How can you tell someone their opinion is wrong, without countering any of their points. All he said is that Falwell apologized for his 9/11 comments. Well isn't that special? I doubt if David Duke apologized for being a horrible bigot Hannity would expect any sort of respect for his death.

Hannity ccmes off as all the things he pegged Hitchens with in this interview. He looked like nothing more than a pseudointellectual jackass and what's even sadder is that there are people out there who would agree with him.

Other Comments by cybercoma

48. Comment #43623 by pewkatchoo on May 22, 2007 at 6:17 am

phasmagigas: Nope, BBC news is just as biased as the interviewing. It all stems from the left taking over the state media in the mid 90s to push their, mostly unwanted, social agenda.

Other Comments by pewkatchoo

49. Comment #43628 by steve99 on May 22, 2007 at 6:32 am

The BBC biased? You have to be kidding. The BBC World Service is one of the most trusted and respected broadcasting services in the world. Exactly which social agendas do you think the BBC is pushing? I would be interested to know.

Other Comments by steve99

50. Comment #43640 by waxwings on May 22, 2007 at 7:01 am

'Liberal bias' in the media is one of those Orwellian terms right wing nut jobs like to use in their efforts to demonstrate that up is down, left is right, good is bad, or any other perversion of common sense. By 'liberal bias', what they mean is 'reporting news that might reflect unfavorably on right wing politicians and programs.' Liberal bias is in effect whenever war casualties, contractor fraud, criminal behavior on the part of Republican politicians, etc, are reported.

Note that the factual inaccuracy of the reporting is not a factor in 'liberal bias'; quite the opposite, it's factual accuracy that produces the 'bias' that tends to make liars and hypocrites look bad. As a result, liberal bias is rampant in every respected news outlet and totally absent from the one news outlet that gets no respect: Fox.

Other Comments by waxwings